Henry Armstrong and Floyd Mayweather switch eras

:deal

 

Does this not show how good 37 yr old floyd is!!

 

A 37 year old who loses or at best goes life and death with Devon Alexander's leftovers is not a great example of solid boxing

 

floyd would thrive in any era. much too adept for that era's fighters

 

yet he barely adapts to survive against B-class Castillo (who is really 1-1) and Maidana (who Roger Mayweatehr said beat no one impressive)

 

define what b class is.

 

PBF would have refused to switch era,s !! Seriously, in Armstrong,s ear where you actually HAD to fight the top fighters and champs. Hard to envision Floyd lasting that long... You were NOT allowed to cherry-pick back in the day. Those guys fought like beasts for all 15 rds...Geez,like someone posted,Castillo gave him BIG problems...

 

People love to trumpet floyds win over diego corrales but neglect to mention (because most dont know it) that Corrales didnt make weight (they lied at the weigh in and Floyd accepted a payoff to go ahead), was dead weak and emaciated at the weigh in (despite still not making 130), and was basically forced into that fight because it could have been his last payday as he was headed for prison for throwing his pregnant wife down a flight of stairs. That fight isnt nearly as impressive when framed within the context of what actually happened, thats besides the fact that Corrales proved to be very beatable anyway. Does anyone actually believe that Armstrong wouldnt have absolutely crushed Corrales much less that weak as a kitten, clueless, chinny version of Corrales?

 

Armstrong would be undefeated... except for a dozen or so losses by disqualifications, because of his style.

 

I don't think any fighter could have stayed undefeated in armstrong's era for any significant length of time. Men were too busy in those days to give their injuries sufficient time to heal while properly preparing for the next challenge. Even some of the champions were appearing in the ring more times in a single year than some prospects do now. It also largely explains why so many records of that era reflect more defeats than those of today.

 

Jeez, Floyds hands give up well before he does anything of note! The smaller gloves and numerous fights per year take their toll and he breaks himself trying.

Bring Armstrong into today's era and he is a phenom, mini Tyson. You'd hurt your foot trying to kick him in the face!

Conversely though, I think a peak 'Floyd Vs Armstrong' is very competitive......

 

Assuming he's as well connected as he was back in the day, I doubt it.

 

this is probably the most honest and accurate way to pit great fighters from weaker Era's against top fighters from greater Era's.

sure the best would be competitive h2h & peak for peak, but overall most lesser Era fighters would lose, but the bigger question, as I've always maintained,is, " just how many would fall away after a spell among the top" shines a whole new light on the Greatness, Toughness and DEMANDS of these better Era's.

but a very accurate understanding in that statement of yours.

 

Cheers Thistle1, I agree that an imaginary 'fight-night' between two peak performers is a mile away from the assessment of 'how they would handle life at the top' if their eras were swapped.

Floyd can't handle the (Circa 30s) pace due to his fragility, and who knows how his training goes without the wonderful gym he and his father earned for him..?

Armstrong is a physical freak for sure but if growing up in the 90's for instance, how much of his resolve and heart would he retain? He sure ain't bustin' a gut day in-day out on a railroad and fighting his way out of that life-style.

People often say " You can only fight what's in front of you " and so it's true that fighters can only fight in the era that they're in.